12 Angry Men
Recently,much attention has been given to the release of the West Memphis Three, whom served nearly 20 years on death row over a triple-homicide they did not commit. It goes without saying that mistrials still happen even in a time as advanced as ours.
12 Angry Men not only addressees the issue of mistrials it attempts to unearth it's root cause. The narrative, however idealistic, attempts to clear the smoke of prejudice and reveal the humanity even in the most embittered and hateful jurors. The inevitability of the conclusion does not rob 12 Angry Men of tension, but rather complements the innate humanism. Sidney Lumet succinctly states the point of the film in his autobiographical book Making Movies: "Listen."
The audience's introduction to the world and characters is efficient and purposed: a single establishing shot of the Court House, it's hallways, the closing statements and the judges call for the jury to deliberate their case. A guilty verdict will effectively end his life.
In the jury room, we are introduced to a pensive Henry Fonda. Little backstory or motive was needed for Juror no. 8. The audience of the day, well already well acquainted with him through the sympathetic roles in William A. Wellman's Ox-Bow Incident, John Ford's The Grapes of Wrath, and Preston Sturges' The Lady Eve, didn't need much more to be firmly on his side. His world weary eyes and calm, measured demeanor made (and makes) him relatable to working class America. His casting was a stroke of genius.
After the jurors settle, a vote is taken. It is Juror no. 8's sole non-guilty vote against eleven guilty votes. How he firmly stands his ground in the moments afterwards is a thing of grace. With heavy opposition, most notably Jurors 3 (Lee J. Cobb) and 10 (Ed Begley), he manages to convince the jury to review a key piece of evidence: the knife. One night after jury duty he visited several pawn shops in the boy's neighborhood (presumably Latino) in search of a similar knife. Lo and behold the knife was not as rare as the prosecution claimed. A second preliminary vote is now conducted: the vote is now 10-2. The trajectory of this film makes itself perfectly clear: the examination of each subsequent piece of evidence will bring about a change of heart. The boy's whereabouts that night, the testimony of the elderly man downstairs, and that of the woman who allegedly got a clean view of the murderer from across the train tracks while lying on her bed will all be under discussion.
It's remarkable that a film that only cost $300,000 could be so engrossing. The script by Reginald Rose is filled with rich, believable characters. Considering the themes, It was quite a feat that the film never devolves into caricature a la Joel Schumacher's A Time to Kill. The direction by first time motion picture director Sidney Lumet is absolutely flawless. In the early going, the film keeps a professional distance, choosing to compose in wide screen coupled with very relaxed, but efficient, editing. As was commonplace for the time, actions were accomplished with a minimum of cuts. As the film progresses, however, the pace quickens and many of the shots become tighter, which is perfectly in sync with the narrative: as an audience, we are listening and await each jurors non-guilty vote.
12 Angry Men isn't regarded as a landmark film today solely due to its historical value, but rather its spellbinding power to move audiences from disparate backgrounds today. It's an essential because its truths will always be relevant. Until an unforeseeable time where crime, pain and prejudice cease to exist, it will retain its potency.
All countries
Argentina
Austria
Belgium
Brazil
Bulgaria
Chile
China
Colombia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Estonia
Denmark
Finland
Greece
Hong Kong
Hungary
Iceland
Indonesia
Ireland
Israel
India
Latvia
Lithuania
Malaysia
New Zealand
Norway
Philippines
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Singapore
South Africa
South Korea
Sweden
Switzerland
Taiwan
Thailand
Turkey
Ukraine
United Arab Emirates
Linear Mode
